What We Learned From Day 1 of the Uber and Alphabet Trial (arstechnica.com) 25
Recode highlights the presentations each side gave on Day 1 in the Waymo v. Uber trial: Alphabet's self-driving arm, Waymo, and Uber gave their opening statements in front of a jury on Monday, commencing the courtroom phase of what has already been a messy legal battle. The day was entirely about opening arguments, but both Uber's and Waymo's strategy centers largely on one thing: Our opponent stooped to the levels they did because they were afraid we would beat them. Uber claims Waymo's lawsuit is baseless and is only suing because they were upset they were losing top talent at a time when competing companies began gaining ground. Waymo claims Uber was worried about getting beat in the self-driving car race so it stole Waymo's trade secrets when it hired one of its former executives. If Uber loses the case, it could have to pay out millions of dollars in damages and potentially stall its self-driving efforts. For Waymo, losing the case will have largely reputational risks. Alphabet rarely, if ever, sues over any issues with people or other companies, which means this litigation carries a lot of weight.
Uber as the defense doesn't have to prove anything, just cast enough doubt on Waymo's claims. Waymo has to prove both motivation on the part of Uber to intentionally steal trade secrets, and that the information Uber stole was proprietary. "That was quite the story," Uber attorney Bill Carmody said in his opening statement. "I want to tell you right up front. It didn't happen, there's no conspiracy, there's no cheating, period end of story." It'll be up to the jury to determine if Waymo has presented enough evidence to prove that not only did Uber steal trade secrets, that the company was using them in their current self-driving technology. Painting Waymo as a company that was growing increasingly concerned over losing top engineers to Uber -- in addition to harboring personal grievances against Levandowski -- could help the ride-hail company convince the jury that Waymo had ulterior motives with its lawsuit. Recode has a detailed list in their report of all the evidence Uber and Waymo presented against one another, as well as their strategies going forward.
Uber as the defense doesn't have to prove anything, just cast enough doubt on Waymo's claims. Waymo has to prove both motivation on the part of Uber to intentionally steal trade secrets, and that the information Uber stole was proprietary. "That was quite the story," Uber attorney Bill Carmody said in his opening statement. "I want to tell you right up front. It didn't happen, there's no conspiracy, there's no cheating, period end of story." It'll be up to the jury to determine if Waymo has presented enough evidence to prove that not only did Uber steal trade secrets, that the company was using them in their current self-driving technology. Painting Waymo as a company that was growing increasingly concerned over losing top engineers to Uber -- in addition to harboring personal grievances against Levandowski -- could help the ride-hail company convince the jury that Waymo had ulterior motives with its lawsuit. Recode has a detailed list in their report of all the evidence Uber and Waymo presented against one another, as well as their strategies going forward.
Uber is a criminal organization (Score:4, Interesting)
Uber is a criminal organization, as has been shown time and time again by their premeditated illegal actions. They get caught and do the "Aw shucks oopsie ya got us" routine, pay a fine, and then go on to do it again.
Re: (Score:2)
I've always had the impression that Uber is going to go away, much like HD DVD did. Or merge, like Sirius did with XM. But then I was sure the Pats would win by 14.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
It's a schema which invested a lot of capital investment. They don't mind paying fines just for staying in the market and pump their numbers with that. Once the whole thing collapses, they'll take their bonuses and head to Bahamas.
How did they get the emails? Gmail? (Score:1)
How did google get Uber's emails? Did they use gmail?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
"He looks like a bad guy so he's probably guilty" turns out to be a really bad way to run a courtroom.
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree in this case. Intent is an important element of crime, and their previous "lack of ethics" should be a factor in considering intent.
Re: (Score:2)
their previous "lack of ethics" should be a factor in considering intent.
I don't think that's how it works: "Evidence of a person’s character or character trait is not admissible to prove that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character or trait."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/ru... [cornell.edu]
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, but the Waymo guys have to decide that's relevant and then educate the jury. (They get to do this while Uber shouts "Fake News" over and over in the background.)
Re: (Score:2)
I would imagine that anyone who knows anything about Uber has been excluded from the jury. Moreover, the evidence of Uber's numerous (alleged) indiscretions probably won't be given to the jury unless it is somehow directly relevant to the case.
Nonetheless, I reckon I'd rather be a Waymo lawyer than an Uber lawyer. I don't think trying to defend Uber in this case is going to be much fun.
Waymo will win (Score:3)
because they have waymo' dollars and lawyers than Uber does.
Re: (Score:1)
But this case is waymo important to uber than it is to waymo. If uber loses it's a huge setback, if waymo loses nothing changes.
Re: (Score:2)
Both have essentially infinite resources. Tens of billions of dollars, and the need to win the case. This case will not be decided by who can outspend the other.
Douche Bag Central! (Score:2)
Uber is going DOWN DOWN DOWN. Their history as Class "A" Douche Bags seals the deal even before the trial.
So Uber was using Google Calendar to schedule? (Score:2)
Not the sharpest move, I'd say. Considering what they were scheduling.